Chest trauma: First 48 hours management

Affiliation auteursAffiliation ok
TitreChest trauma: First 48 hours management
Type de publicationJournal Article
Year of Publication2017
AuteursBouzat P, Raux M, David JStephane, Tazarourte K, Galinski M, Desmettre T, Garrigue D, Ducros L, Michelet P, Freysz M, Savary D, Rayeh-Pelardy F, Laplace C, Duponq R, Bares VMonnin, D'Journo XBenoit, Boddaert G, Boutonnet M, Pierre S, Leone M, Honnart D, Biais M, Vardon F
JournalANAESTHESIA CRITICAL CARE & PAIN MEDICINE
Volume36
Pagination135-145
Date PublishedAPR
Type of ArticleArticle
ISSN2352-5568
Mots-clésAnalgesia, Blunt Chest Trauma, Chest Trauma, Intensive care, Penetrating Chest Trauma, Severity Criteria, ventilation
Résumé

Chest trauma remains an issue for health services for both severe and apparently mild trauma management. Severe chest trauma is associated with high mortality and is considered liable for 25% of mortality in multiple traumas. Moreover, mild trauma is also associated with significant morbidity especially in patients with preexisting conditions. Thus, whatever the severity, a fast-acting strategy must be organized. At this time, there are no guidelines available from scientific societies. These expert recommendations aim to establish guidelines for chest trauma management in both prehospital an in hospital settings, for the first 48 hours. The ``Societe francaise d'anesthesie reanimation'' and the ``Societe francaise de mdecine d'urgence'' worked together on the 7 following questions: (1) criteria defining severity and for appropriate hospital referral; (2) diagnosis strategy in both pre- and in-hospital settings; (3) indications and guidelines for ventilatory support; (4) management of analgesia; (5) indications and guidelines for chest tube placement; (6) surgical and endovascular repair indications in blunt chest trauma; (7) definition, medical and surgical specificity of penetrating chest trauma. For each question, prespecified ``crucial'' (and sometimes also ``important'') outcomes were identified by the panel of experts because it mattered for patients. We rated evidence across studies for these specific clinical outcomes. After a systematic Grade (R) approach, we defined 60 recommendations. Each recommendation has been evaluated by all the experts according to the DELPHI method. (C) 2017 Societe francaise d'anesthesie et de reanimation (Sfar). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

DOI10.1016/j.accpm.2017.01.003